ravishingravi Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 This is fun. Both are *****s imo. But Goswami needed this. http://www.timesnow.tv/Debate-Shouldnt-Hasan-Ali-be-in-Prison/videoshow/4366870.cms
beetle Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 ...including those who own timesnow...:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:the infant goswami has no answer for that. As much as I can't stand the likes of Mani shankar aiyar and jethmalanis......someone needed to slap this Arnob Goswami on the face.:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
Desi Cartman Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 sala Mani always smiles whenever he is on the screen or phone with Barkha. He was asked one thing that why has govt not done anything even after knowing so much about this criminal. I dont see it as Pwnage of Arnab , in fact it shows that Arnab haz been pwning congress, although I dont watch times now .. but I suppose Times now is a little bit better than Barkha and her friends
Clarke Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 ^^ Exactly, what's with Arnab owned and all ? All Mani Shankar does is attack Arnab for doing his role i.e. asking questions the public wants an answer for. The typical politician attacks him left right and center instead of answering the question. Why can't he just say they don't have evidence against him that stands in a court ? Or for the fact that it takes years to get any justice because of our judicial system ? He just can't, because some of his fellow cronies were making a buck along with Hasan and they waited for the issue to die out.
Karan114 Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 I'm no fan of Arnab but I have to agree with desi and Clarke - my thought upon seeing that video is Aiyar's pathetic obfuscation, not any humiliation for Arnab. Aiyar should be getting the vitriol for his party's deliberate lethargy in letting this man get away, not Arnab for rightly calling the government out.
achilles Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 The fact that all(most) of us seem to have a soft-corner for Arnab in this episode is because Arnab played a tactical masterstroke. Smiling, logically taking apart criticism with proof and not responding to fire with fire is the most effective trick in the book. Kudos, Arnab. Great job, Comrade :hatsoff:
ravishingravi Posted March 7, 2011 Author Posted March 7, 2011 The way I saw the situation was, Arnab did not reply because he could not reply. On national television, a senior politician was calling his bluff, saying exactly what he knows is the truth. Now, whether Aiyar was right in saying it in this context or not is arguable. Essentially it something Aiyar has been wanting to say for some time. Every single word he said about Arnab is truth imo. I know times now is trying carve a niche for itself as the moral arbitrator, as the jingoistic, knee jerk and reactionary news channel to grab the eye balls. But they should be ready for this kind of response if and when they get it. It is quite noticeable how after pawnage, Arnab toned down and almost made the panellist speak their minds without interrupting them.
Mariyam Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 I'm completely in agreement with what Ravi has posted. Some of us here seem to have a bias against Mani Shankar Iyer for his ideology ( or lack of). But keeping that bias aside, focus on the bigger question here; why was he called to the show? Does he hold any public post now? When he was a part of the government, did he hold any post to do with the judiciary or the IT department. I don't think so. Why should anyone assume that he would be in the know about the finer details of this case. Mahesh Jethmalani Sir, was in the know probably because it has something to do with his profession. It was very clear that Mani Shankar Iyer wasn't aware of many things about this case. He couldn't speak even 2-3 lines on the topic. Calling him on the show and asking him pointed questions about something that was outside the scope of his defined duty ( when in power) is pretty callous I think. You might as well ask him for his views on therapeutic uses of shrubs found in the Australian outback. Do we question a TTE on the Chennai Kanyakumari express if a train accident happened in Bengal? Generally, Mani Shankar Iyer is a very smart, fun to watch, witty and articulate individual. He doesn't fit the stereotypical image of an Indian politician. Arnab on the other hand, does not necessarily have enough information on the topics he is hosting. The so called 'documents' and 'facts' that he kept referring have been made public by the various government agencies. Its not as if he or Times Now discovered those on an anti corruption/ fact finding mission. Based on his limited understanding of those facts, he expects answers on complex issues over a 15 minute show? And add to that, his constant interjection when someone is speaking and asking tangential questions in a louder voice. To make the viewers feel that Arnab has nailed it, yet again. Just speaking in a louder voice shaking your head doesn't mean that you are right. The entire point of a discussion is so that the viewers can have both sides of the arguement. The function of the host is to ensure that a civil discussion takes place and that every participant has an equal chance to speak. The host is not expected to take sides or superimpose his opinion on an issue. He after all, is the person with the least knowledge on these issues. Why can't Arnab be a good host? If he wants some kind of ego stroking, he should join the taklu brothers and judge MTV Roadies. My super boss was called on one of these shows, regarding a property dispute in Mumbai. He said that the host had no idea about the basics of property law in the country in particular and Mumbai in general. But the host kept asking and interjecting as if she were the be all and end all on the issue. The program was edited and many a times what the panelists say is cut down and doesn't convey the full meaning of what they had initially said. And in the end of each of these programs, its the host who comes up with a pseudo moralistic statement about how the government ( or someone) has failed yet again in xyz and how they are lacking in this and that etc etc etc. Whats the point of calling someone, when their views are going to be distorted and misinterpret? If Arnab Goswami had done his due homework on the case, he should know whom to call and what questions to ask. Asking Mani Shankar Iyer, if something (which he has nothing to do with) is embarrassing is embarrassing. Bottom line, do your homework before you call someone on these shows. Just superficiality and sensationalism does not a good journalist make. Alif Be ka ilm nahi, chale miyan Ghalib bannay. :dontknow:
ViruRulez Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 Both are massive attention-hoggers and believes in Peepli Live kind of publicity and both of them are highly irritating. Dont care if they screw each other. Good for the rest of the world.
Clarke Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 ... Bottom line, do your homework before you call someone on these shows. Just superficiality and sensationalism does not a good journalist make. Alif Be ka ilm nahi, chale miyan Ghalib bannay. :dontknow: You cannot expect a TV news anchor/journalist that hosts some discussion to know all matters in depth. He can study them in depth if he has time but my guess is his plate is full. He does need to be a good host and it seems he's not. The reason they invite Mani Shankar is because he is an INC member and will be ready to defend his party & their govt. If he's not an expert on the topic, he can refrain from the invitation and does not need to go hyper on the host. The media will try to add sensationalism in trying to make the govt look like a bunch of losers but it cannot be impossible to answer sensibly. Jayanti Natarajan does it all the time, for instance 'we are pursuing the due legal process' answer to any such scam. I'll agree on the quality of journalism i.e. the lack of it. The idea is to have a govt rep. vs opposition rep. debate, a very loud one. Its not as much about the news and facts since that will not have as many viewers. If that was really the objective, they'd devote most of the time to the expert they invited, who unfortunately ended up like a sideshow.
asterix Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 Mani had too much opinion about CWG. Mani has been defending his party for years on various issues..So it was not wrong to call him in the discussion. If he didn't wanted to be in the discussion, he could've declined..
yoda Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 I find it amazing how people are quick to defend politicians and to bash journalists. Remember that without the media, none of the corruption scandals will even come to light. Our govt. has and will always be a master at hushing all truth. Arnab has a very valid point. Why did the govt which had evidence about this guy since 2007-2008, not act for so long? And if he didn't ask the question, how many of us would even know that the govt had evidence against this guy for 3 or 4 years? If M. Iyer has no clue, he can say I am the wrong person to answer this question. What is not acceptable is for him to declare that the reporter is the wrong person to ask the question. It is the right of the media to question these guys, as the common man has no direct access to them.
Desi Cartman Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 He was representing congress like he does on NDTV, he was asked questions just like he gets asked on NDTV but I always see him smile looking at barkha but here he was just angry. What did arnab ask him ? That why has govt done nothing about it , Is that the wrong question ?
Guest Gunner Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 I'm completely in agreement with what Ravi has posted. Some of us here seem to have a bias against Mani Shankar Iyer for his ideology ( or lack of). But keeping that bias aside, Mani shankar aiyar was PA to Rajiv Gandhi, he will never amount to aything more than that in my books. The fact that he wins elections from south Tamil Nadu ( a hometown he hasn't been to in years) is the sad reflection of Indian democracy. /end story.
urbestfriend Posted March 8, 2011 Posted March 8, 2011 I hate this Arnab guy to the core. As someone pointed out, he usually lacks depth in any topic, he is not even ready to hear arguments from both sides, keep repeating the same stuff which he has prepared before the show though there are valid counter arguments to his case, brushes off and interrupt anyone who doesn't speak hes line and take a high moral ground without listening to what others have to offer. He needed this badly but Aiyar really didn't succeed as he went hyper without a reason as if it looked like he was already prepared to blast Goswami off even before coming to the show and Arnab came out really better than expected of him with his cool demeanor.
Sachin=GOD Posted March 8, 2011 Posted March 8, 2011 Mani shankar aiyar was PA to Rajiv Gandhi, he will never amount to aything more than that in my books. The fact that he wins elections from south Tamil Nadu ( a hometown he hasn't been to in years) is the sad reflection of Indian democracy. /end story. IIRC he was an IFS officer for 20 odd years before entering politics. And he does'nt win elections regularly, in fact he lost the 2009 Lok Sabha elections by a big margin.
Recommended Posts